On 7 Nov 2001 09:40:53 -0800, misterniceguy@my-deja.com (Matt Marin) wrote:

>I've had an XL1 for a few years, and my experience with that and a
>VX1000 had led me to believe autofocus on camcorders was next to
>useless. (It never occurred to me to ask why an SLR's AF can work
>great and a camcorder's has to suck.) But I had occasion to briefly
>use a PD100A recently and was surprised to find that the AF seemed to
>work quite well, even in low light.
>
>Am I right in thinking AF may actually be useful, and, if so, does
>anyone have an opinion on which models have the "best" AF?

This one is easy - I have tried several (see;
www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/camcorder-comparison.htm ),
and the VX-2000/PD-150 AF is so good, I almost never
use MF anymore. The TRV-900 AF is good (and better
than some others), but it hunts in moderately low
light, and cannot AF well in low light; the 2000/150
can - and the AF speed is leisurely, giving it an
"MF" look as it finds focus (*without* hunting, as
the subject distance shifts...). It is fooled only
by bright, contrasty texture behind a main subject,
but otherwise it outperforms me in focusing. Try
it - you will be amazed...;-)